digitalmars.D - rawCopy, rawTransfer, rawFind ?
- Dmitry Olshansky (37/37) Oct 26 2012 Finally got to this: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8349
- Damian (6/45) Oct 26 2012 These should definitely be put into the language!! but they'd
Finally got to this: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8349 Half way through it become obvious to me that we'll have similar problems with memcpy and it's ilk every time somebody optimizes bit-wise copy/move/find. More then that I think that we lack a specific set of low-level functions that cover all of C's mem* functionality. (The focus is on fast primitives.) Currently there are obvious gaps: memset ---> cast(ubyte[]) + array ops memcpy ---> cast(ubyte[]) + array ops (also breaks with overlap) ...so far so good... memmove ---> ??? memchr ---> cast(ubyte[]) + std.algorithm.find is *not* good enough (in fact std.algorithm.find arguably could use memchr to greatly optimize some specializations (!) ) Why don't we just use C's ones? a) CTFE-ability, alternatively we can just hard wire all of common libc functions into CTFE b) more generality and/or flexibility, e.g. despite it's speed memchr can't search for ushort or uint c) safer, as it would operate on slices of _typed_ arrays, not pointer + number of _bytes_ So I propose the following set of low-level tools for inclusion into Phobos or druntime: system: //bitblit, doesn't call destructors/postblits //also can be used to forcibly move structs void rawCopy(T)(const(T) src, T dest); //same, but also works with overlapped memory chunks void rawTransfer(T)(const(T) src, T dest); //fast search, bitwise comparison only void rawFind(T)(const(T)[] src, const(T) needle); Well the above is a sketch. Maybe I'm digging in the wrong direction and this stuff just needs to be somewhere among compiler's intrinsics. (so that it can do some magic if the size is known in advance etc.) -- Dmitry Olshansky
Oct 26 2012
On Friday, 26 October 2012 at 21:25:22 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:Finally got to this: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8349 Half way through it become obvious to me that we'll have similar problems with memcpy and it's ilk every time somebody optimizes bit-wise copy/move/find. More then that I think that we lack a specific set of low-level functions that cover all of C's mem* functionality. (The focus is on fast primitives.) Currently there are obvious gaps: memset ---> cast(ubyte[]) + array ops memcpy ---> cast(ubyte[]) + array ops (also breaks with overlap) ...so far so good... memmove ---> ??? memchr ---> cast(ubyte[]) + std.algorithm.find is *not* good enough (in fact std.algorithm.find arguably could use memchr to greatly optimize some specializations (!) ) Why don't we just use C's ones? a) CTFE-ability, alternatively we can just hard wire all of common libc functions into CTFE b) more generality and/or flexibility, e.g. despite it's speed memchr can't search for ushort or uint c) safer, as it would operate on slices of _typed_ arrays, not pointer + number of _bytes_ So I propose the following set of low-level tools for inclusion into Phobos or druntime: system: //bitblit, doesn't call destructors/postblits //also can be used to forcibly move structs void rawCopy(T)(const(T) src, T dest); //same, but also works with overlapped memory chunks void rawTransfer(T)(const(T) src, T dest); //fast search, bitwise comparison only void rawFind(T)(const(T)[] src, const(T) needle); Well the above is a sketch. Maybe I'm digging in the wrong direction and this stuff just needs to be somewhere among compiler's intrinsics. (so that it can do some magic if the size is known in advance etc.)These should definitely be put into the language!! but they'd have to be 100% reliable for me to adopt them over C equivalents. unit std.memory anyone?
Oct 26 2012